PITTSBURGH - Pittsburgh International could become the nation's first major airport to get the OK to abandon the post-Sept. 11 rule that says only ticketed passengers are allowed past security checkpoints.

AP Photo

AP Photo
Slideshow: Homeland Security

Federal security officials are considering allowing people once more to say their hellos and goodbyes to friends and loved ones at the gate.

Airport officials and western Pennsylvania's congressional delegation have pushed for two years for the change for reasons of money and passenger convenience.

What happens here could become a model for other airports.

"This is new, this is exciting, because we're basically rewriting the security directives in order to allow nonticketed passengers to go through security," said JoAnn Jenny, spokeswoman for the Allegheny County Airport Authority, which runs the airport.

Pittsburgh is a strong candidate for the experiment for two reasons: It has a centralized security checkpoint in one terminal. And it has a full-scale shopping mall that has suffered a drop-off in business because it is reachable only by ticketed passengers.

If the change is approved, people without tickets will have to go through security just like passengers. They will be checked with metal detectors and may have to empty their pockets and handbags and take off their shoes.

"I think you'd find most Americans would agree and go along with this idea," said Brian Muth of Reynoldsville.

Muth and his wife are hosting an exchange student from Ecuador, Lorena Lopez. On Tuesday, Sharon Muth bid a tearful farewell, on this side of security, to the girl's parents after they paid a short visit.

And Muth cried again when she thought of bringing Lorena back to the airport in June, knowing the teen might be alone when she boards her flight home.

"Lorena's just become part of our family," she said, dabbing tears with a tissue.

Officials with the federal Transportation Security Administration met recently with Pittsburgh officials and expect to review a rough draft of the plan later this spring. It could take effect by summer if approved by the Homeland Security Department, Jenny said.

Certain issues still need to be worked out, such as how to prevent the people without tickets from holding up passengers during peak travel times.

"There's a customer service benefit to be had here, but at the end of the day, the security of the flying public at the Pittsburgh airport is going to come before anything else," said Ann Davis, TSA's Northeast regional spokeswoman. "And I think passengers appreciate that."

In the security crackdown in the weeks after Sept. 11, the Federal Aviation Administration (news - web sites) said the nation's airports may no longer allow people without tickets past security checkpoints. It was among several security measures, some of which have since been relaxed, such as a ban on curbside pickups and the parking of cars close to terminals.

In certain hardship cases — say, if an airline passenger is disabled, cannot speak English or is a child — a friend or family member can get a pass to go through security and accompany the traveler.

At the Pittsburgh airport, for example, Lorena Lopez accompanied her parents Tuesday because they do not speak English. And Jackie Crusan was allowed to go through security with her friend, Devin Seeger, because he broke both his legs while performing in a dirt bike show in Pennsylvania.

And in January, the TSA started allowing military families to accompany soldiers to airline gates.

But everybody else still says their goodbyes on this side of the security apparatus, which experts say discourages some people from traveling and keeps well-wishers from spending more money in the nation's airports.

One industry expert said the Pittsburgh plan makes sense because airports need all the revenue they can find.

If the airport can make more money from merchant leases and parking fees, it can cut the rates airlines are charged to use the terminal, said Stephen Van Beek of the Airport Councils International-North America, a trade group.

That revenue is especially important in Pittsburgh, where US Airways, which controls about 80 percent of the gates, has been threatening to leave because of higher-than-average gate fees.

The Pittsburgh airport has a genuine shopping mall, Airmall, inside the main terminal, with 100 stores and restaurants — not just concession stands and souvenir shops, but brand-name establishments with the kind of prices found at an ordinary shopping center.

Mark Knight, regional manager for Airmall operator BAA USA Inc., said business is down about 12 percent in the past year. He said nearly half of that that is due to the security rule, while the rest is attributable to a drop in passengers caused by US Airways, which is cutting flights because of the gate fees.

"In this economy that other 4 or 5 percent could mean the difference between success and failure" for an Airmall business, Knight said.

This is my first posting!!!! I am proud to be a part of this great community!!! Hopefully ORD will open security next so I can go to Terminal 3 (The Delta concourse) and I can sit in front of International Terminal 5 and watch the international carriers again. This would be great news, right?

You got to be careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there.

OK sure the topic has been talked about before but the odds of this happening are actually higher now. If Pittsburgh goes through with this other major airports such as ORD, MIA, DFW, JFK, LAX, ATL are sure to follow.

You got to be careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there.

I hope it doesn't.. This just means longer security lines at the airport because some people want to go look at planes. This can be done outside of the terminal. There is NO need for non traveling people to be in the terminal area.

While this might happen, I find it rather silly. We now have, all things considering, a pretty efficient screening system--in that at most airports, everything is concentrated at the checkpoint. The checkpoint is where you show your BP and ID, the selectees get shuffled off to the side for the extra-special TSA treatment, and then the security process is finished.

With pax screening at the gate, we will return to ID checks at each gate (which slows the boarding process IMO) and selectee searches at the gate--where screeners don't have the additional equipment (x-ray, ETD) that exist at the checkpoint.

Of course, the next time we hit "orange level"--which seems to happen about 2x year or so--I bet this will all get shut down again, at least temporarily.

As long as al Qaeda and like minded individuals salivate over aviation-related targets, there is no reason to free up security controls over areas that lead directly to commercial aircraft.

I'm not saying the current system is perfect or is some sort of magic safeguard. Yes, I know the 9-11 hijackers were passengers. But that doesn't equate to "let's open up the concourses to anyone who wants to go there." Limited access is a better policy.

Guys, guys, GUYS!!!!!! (And girls too...) Re-read the first sentence in that article:

Pittsburgh International could become the nation's first major airport to get the OK to abandon the post-Sept. 11 rule that says only ticketed passengers are allowed past security checkpoints.

The keyword here is could, okay? This means it may happen, it may not happen. Just remember....the TSA/Homeland Security and the F.A.A. has the final say in this matter and the chances are 50/50. They could say okay, but they also could say no.

It also says:to get the OK to abandon the post-Sept. 11 rule...

This means that this has to be approved. Now having said that, if (another keyword here... 'IF')the F.A.A./T.S.A. allows PIT to have non-ticketed pax back on concourse then the F.A.A./T.S.A. has to do the same with the other U.S. airports. But then again, I think it varies from airport to airport on this issue. I do know that SJC was one airport that didnt allow non-ticketed pax beyond the security checkpoint pre-9/11.

Also, this issue has been discussed to death in the past although I do NOT favor this idea. Too risky and its an 'invite' to many, many problems.

Once again I am amazed that this was ever allowed in the first place, is the States the only country that had such lax security? Every other country I've been: no boarding pass, no access.....no problem!

This is the exact same bloody article that has been posted over and over... and it is generating the exact same bloody discussion. Everyone on this damn board needs to run with the assumption that there is no possible way that they can be the FIRST person to post such a "news flash". Just find the thread that likely already exists and jump in.

Personally, I think this article is totally BS, and I pray that the proposed change doesn't happen, at least at the airports I frequent. If PIT gets approval, fine, but don't apply that change to DFW, IAH, DCA, etc.

PIT is a key exception because of its mall. Personally, I'd like to see what the people who proposed the whole "mall-in-an-airport" idea were smoking at the time, but that's a different story. No other US airport, to my knowledge, has the commerce behind security like PIT.

A few things that the airports should keep in mind:

1) More people through security will mean longer lines. The only way to mitigate this will be to add man-hours to the security staff, which means adding costs. I don't think either is worth it -- don't inconvenience the traveler or add to the taxpayer's burden just because Johnny wants to say goodbye to Grandma at the gate, not the checkpoint.
2) Even if each person is effectively screened, security could easily be lessened by this idea. Every time a non-passenger is screened, it is a distraction from screening the real passengers. Again, not worth it for the parents who just have to see their kids off at the gate.

I don't sympathize much with the people mentioned in the article above. I don't think their situations justify changing the policy and inconveniencing other passengers and/or taxpayers. At the least, let the airports decide and pick up the additional costs/complaints. But don't force it on everyone else.

That will not be the case. Your not going to have to show up 4 hours early for your flight. They'll have one, maybe two lines set aside for non-ticketed passengers. The other 8-12 will be for ticketed passengers. This WILL NOT slow down security lines. It's that simple. Non ticketed passengers WILL NOT be a priority for the TSA. And if the TSA mixes them in the same lines as ticketed passengers....then shame on them.

Good point NYC...just because the airport are ALLOWED to let non-ticketed pax through doesn't mean they would--or should.

The absolute trainwreck that is security checkpoint screening at numerous airports in this country would get worse instantly. I don't know how this is a good idea.

Airports have dealt with the revenue gap from forbidding unticketed people through the checkpoint. And since that latest AAAE data would suggest that the average airports' profit margin was well exceeding double digits, they can't scream for any valid and compelling economic reason to rescind the existing rule.

I'm not a fan of this change at all and will echo AAJAX- say goodbye a few hundred feet sooner and get over yourself.

If these airport vendors are showing such notable loss of revenue, why have we not seen a steady decline in airport based book stores, music shops, new stands, bar, restaurants etc. in the post 9/11 airline industry? I travel frequently and have seen few if any closed store fronts.

From what my eyes tell me there is plenty of business keeping these stores open and profitable. In most of the busier airports, I marvel at the amount of bodes walking around and simply cannot imagine it reverting to every Tom, Dick and Harry being able to pass beyond security. I don’t know how I used to stand it!

Travel is already stressful, keeping non-ticketed individuals out of already congested concourses a good way to ease the stress!

Not to mention the GLARING security issues related to a decline in quality control and pressure to move the lines faster thus compromising the level of screening.

Folks, this is about safety. If you want to eat dinner and go shopping, go to a mall! If you want to go into a terminal, buy a ticket and enjoy more than the terminal, fly for God’s sake! It is the ultimate spotting and still fun!

Yes, it was always nice getting to go to the gate. But I am against returning the U.S. to this way until Osama Bin Laden is either dead or in custody. Yes, so unlikely it could happen. But it did. And we paid for it big time. Absolutely no excuse for any airport in the U.S. to do it while Al Qaeda is out there. I hope we don't decide to set ourselves up so history can repeat itself. I vote to tighten security by doing a search of every person boarding a flight, no matter how annoying it may be to a single passenger, it is the best means of absolute security in my opinion. It also prevents embarassment among passengers too, because everyone would have to go through the humiliation. Tighten security I say.

I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for the woman who put her daughter on the plane. What's the big freakin' deal??? I see no difference in this and letting someone board at the gate. She says she can't watch her daughter "take off." Yeah, I'm sure she'll stay around, figure out which MD-80 her daughter is on, and make sure she watches that runway so she sees her daughter take off. UGHH.

And please, PLEASE, don't open the security checkpoint at DAL to non-ticketed passengers. That place is crowded enough as it is.

I just wish people would understand that security is not secondary to their convenience. And that the convenience of the passengers should take precedence over that of non-passengers.

To clear up some areas in my second to most recent post in this topic, the "it" I was referring to in 'Yes, so unlikely it could happen' was September 11th, 2001. I hope this clears up what I'm talking about.

Fly one thing; Fly it well

25 Aloha717200
: As i said in the other thread on this topic, I am 100% in favour of allowing non-ticketed passengers past the security point, as long as they can find

26 Aloha717200
: As i said in the other thread on this topic, I am 100% in favour of allowing non-ticketed passengers past the security point, as long as they can find

27 LEO777
: You know if the terrorists had no tickets and got thru security checkpoints, I would totally agree with most of you but the fact is that they did have

28 Ssides
: LEO777 -- 1) Learn to use the spell check function, please. 2) I'm sure that making President Bush look good was the driving force behind prohibiting